General Election June 2017

I don't know but in January 2016 the Tory government killed a law that would require rental properties to be 'fit for human habitation'.

At least 72 of those who voted it down were landlords:
https://politicalscrapbook.net/2016/01/housing-bill-73-mps-who-voted-down-fit-for-human-habitation-clause-are-landlords/

It's OK at least we've got Shelter to take up the fight post-Grenfell

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/23/two-shelter-board-members-derek-myers-tony-rice-quit-after-grenfell-tower-fire

oh

Am aware of this.

I dug in to this, and as I understand it, the 'fit for human habitation' bit has always been in the L&T act - the problem was it applied only to properties that cost tiny amounts to rent per year.

It was there to stop people from renting their sheds as houses.

There was / is no definition of what 'fit for human habitation' means.

Karen Buck's bill was going to update the L&T act to bring the tiny amounts that triggered the habitation bit of the act in line with today's rental prices.

It was voted down because the government felt that there were enough powers held by Local Authorities to regulate the private rental market and that the power should reside with LAs to enforce, not with tenants and their lawyers.

In my view

the Tory government killed a law that would require rental properties to be 'fit for human habitation'.

is misleading - and the way this has been spun on some internet sites, is fake news.

*ducks*

Myers is a former chief executive of Kensington and Chelsea council, which owns Grenfell Tower, while trustee Tony Rice is chairman of Xerxes Equity, the sole shareholder in Omnis Exteriors – the company that sold the cladding used in the tower.

Ouch.

I didn't think the "muted" response was odd although I was slightly surprised there wasn't anything stronger, they sent a few emails in the last couple of weeks that just seemed to be "yes we are doing stuff, here is what we're doing, also other support if you need it". Not everything needs to be ATTENTION THIS THIS NOW NOW.

Which bit is misleading? The law would require properties to be fit for human habitation? (It would, even if ambiguous).

Or that the Tories killed it?

The motivation doesn't change either of those things, it seems like a factual statement to me.

Everyone left there is gutted that they couldn't risk drawing attention to themselves because of this. Morale is very bad. I've got that from multiple sources.

Yeah not questioning that, just that from the outside it didn't seem off. Looking at it differently in retrospect though. Pretty bad if the biggest active housing charity is being hamstrung by senior figures.

Boils my piss frankly. In any other walk of life that would be called a conflict of interest. But it's all in the member's register of interest so apparently that's ok.

The lunatics are running the asylum.

Boils my piss frankly. In any other walk of life that would be called a conflict of interest. But it's all in the member's register of interest so apparently that's ok.

Problem is that it's precisely because of the skills, background and involvement with other organisations that raises the possibility of a conflict of interest over certain matters, that they've got the potential to be really good board members or trustees with some highly relevant specialist knowledge.

Like you, I don't know that declaring an interest then not taking part in decisions affected by it is necessarily enough - but I don't think I'd have excluded them as trustees.

I've no idea if they've actually been any good while in post, but on paper they ought to have been.

I was talking about the MPs :)

Agree on Shelter, it's just unfortunate really. They do need exactly those kind of people, for a number of reasons.

the Tory government killed a law that would require rental properties to be 'fit for human habitation'.

Which bit is misleading? The law would require properties to be fit for human habitation? (It would, even if ambiguous).

The law already requires properties to be up to defined standards that when added up amount to something like 'fit for human habitation'. The boring core of it seems to be that the government voted down an amendment to the L&T act so that tenants could take civil proceedings if their LA for some reason won't / is dragging it's feet on enforcement.

Or that the Tories killed it?

They killed the amendment, that's for sure. The Law Commission apparently recommended changes like KB was looking for in 1996 - curiously Labour have also killed it by not implementing it, either.

DUP deal done! Of course, making specific spending commitments in return for votes doesn't seem constitutionally dodgy at all, not one bit

They seem to have found a magic money tree too, with £1.5 billion pounds on it to bribe, I mean, encourage the DUP to put the national interest first.

I'm hoping that 1.5 bn will be put to good use here in NI...rather than failed boiler schemes, having to waste it on border controls if the Tories keep going on with hard brexit...

Either way, yeah, not the way it's supposed to be eh? For many reasons... DUP is the orange part of the GFA, there's no green part in Westminster (as the SDLP got routed, SF won't take their seats) so not suspicious at all, no.

I was about to post that. Funny until you start thinking about the effects of austerity but that the Tories can find a cool bil down the back of the sofa to cling on to power...

How much longer can she cling to power? Has she just lost the support of Scottish conservative MPs?

Please tell me that is real...

EDIT: not that May is really a tiny person in silver suit, obviously

It's real. Can't work out if it's brilliant or terrible though, my brain is still processing it I think.

While I obviously agree with strong challenge and criticism of the government, it seems likely that Osborne will ultimately fall foul of his bitter obsession with revenge for May sacking him. As one of the most enthusiastic advocates of austerity, he has been responsible for policies that will have affected the lives of Londoners (for the worse). Obviously Grenfell has become a symbol of exactly that type of policy but did he use his position at the editor to call/campaign for a change of direction?

fuck me, people are still making austin powers jokes. in 2017. up next: the budweiser frogs.

it's shit on a stick.

The ubiquitous bus is back

Giving a billion pounds to those yahoos to spend on flegs - that's what we've come to?

the budweiser frogs

http://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/05/05/ad-the-day-bud-light-remixes-the-famous-budweiser-frogs-ad-new-generation